Records of the Historian, Szuma Chien, Translated by Yang Hsien-yi and Gladys Yang, Chapter Sun Wu and Wu Chi, Page 35, The Commercial Press LTD., Hong Kong, 1975.

Records of the Historian, Szuma Chien, Translated by Yang Hsien-yi and Gladys Yang, Chapter Fan Sui and Tsai Tse, Page 115, The Commercial Press, Hong Kong, 1975.
Given Sima Qian historical records above, the archaeological evidence of Chu settlements in Guangxi is incompatible with the Sima Qian historical record of the Chu conquest of Yang-yue. The natives of Guangxi and Guangdong are long time affiliated allies of Chu whereas the Yang-yue Bai Yue and tribesmen are allies to Yue. The politics and culture of Guangxi and Guangdong are tied to the Chu State whereas the politics and culture of Yang-yue is tied to the Yue State. Therefore the historical records of Sima Qian described above is that of Jiangxi the former Xu Yi State that I had proposed would late became Yang and later still Yang-yue.

However the later histories of Sima Qian would describe Guangdong and Guangxi as a Yang-yue polity as in:
Records of the Grand Historian of China, Ssu-ma Chien, By Burton Watson, Volume II, The Age of Emperor Wu, 140 to Circa 100 B.C., Shih Chi 113, The Account of Southern Yueh, Page 239, Columbia University Press, New York and London, 1961.
I would propose that Guangdong and Guangxi became associated with Yang-yue in two stages. The first stage is when Qin conquered Luliang Qin renamed Luliang Nan Yue. Qin had planned to resettle the Yue population that it has conquered to Luliang and therefore renamed Luliang Nan Yue. Qin had planned to resettle the Chu population it has prior conquered to Yue lands. These Qin resettlement programs Qin carried out with success. The Chu population was resettled in Yue lands. The Yue population was resettled in Nan Yue. The heart of the former Chu State was given over to the Qin Generals, Qin Officers, and Qin Soldiers who had taken part in the successful campaign against Chu. Later Qin settlers also settled in Chu as well as other parts of the Qin Empire. The pattern of Qin resettlement programs indicated the Qin themselves would settled in neighboring states and the population of conquered neighboring states would be resettled in newly conquered states further out. The Qin would settle in Chu, Hann, Wei, and Zhao. The conquered populations of Chu, Hann, and Zhao would be moved and resettled in new conquered lands further out such as the Yue States. The populations of the Yue States was shunted to Luliang which the Qin renamed Nan Yue. The second stage of Guangxi and Guangdong becoming associated with Yang-yue began with the arrival of the Bai Yue settlers from Yang-yue (Jiangxi) under the Qin. When Qin fell and Zhao To established his new kingdom with the help of the Bai Yue from Yang-yue (Jiangxi). Zhao To and his people run his new kingdom with the help of the Bai Yue from Yang-yue. During this time further Bai Yue migration in to Guangxi and Guangdong from Yang-yue (Jiangxi) would have taken place because of the rebellion and turmoil of the central plains. Ordinary people would identify Zhao To’s new kingdom with the Bai Yue in Guangxi and Guangdong who had come from Yang-yue (Jiangxi).






Wai-Sing Fung 馮偉盛

You look like a southern chinese. Khmer people look like the malays of indonesia.



I have seen southern chinese which look like that vietnamese soldier. The chinese on the left may be of northern chinese looks (tungusa).

Some of the kids look like southern chinese and some look like the khmers.
It is just like showing a picture of both overseas chinese and malay indonesians together.

Interesting debate, it's like a half-empty glass or a half-filled glass.

Anyway, I am cantonese and like foldup_gryphon, cantonese migrated southward. Why I agree to this? I do not know if all cantonese has this nor can I remember the detail.

My last toes on both legs got double nails. We have 2nails in that toe. It was shared in the newspaper once these were XX ppl moving south to Guangdong area. XX because I saw that article back in probably pri1-2 which is 1978/9. I cannot remember what name for that "group of chinese" was known as. But only my mother got such nails while my dad who came from Hong Kong do not have it.

Then again, genetically all of us were from the same origin and believe to be Africa.

So Cantonese or Vietnamese or Chinese....we are Africans? LOL

Am I the only chinese here who agree that the people of gwangxi, cantonese and vietnamese are related in terms of zhuang-han chinese admixture ? By yue, you mean zhuang ethnic group ? As bai yue means one thousand ethnic groups. The zhuang people are the largest minority in this part of southern china and geographically those 3 provinces are very close together.

Maybe they are mixed to different degrees, the cantonese have more han chinese genes, the vietnamese have less han chinese blood, don't know about the zhuang in gwangxi though.

To say that vietnamese have zero blood relationship with the han chinese is not logical seeing that it was under china's rule for 1200 years ! If the original vietnamese language and culture have been sinicised so much, how can their gene pool not be ? It is not as if both groups look so different from each other like the white american and the african americans that impedes interracial marriages so how can intermarriages be impossible ???

If you go to south east asian countries like thailand, you can see a lot of intermarriages even though that country was not even under china's direct control, let alone 1200 years !

One final note: Leave out the pictures of southern vietnamese as some of them have khmer/cham people admixture or pure cham people. There was a country called champa in the area of southern vietnam a few hundred years ago before the annamese absorbed the country and its people.

Let us also leave out those recent migrants to the gwangdung province from the north , we are looking at the true cantonese who have been there since the han dynasty. The recent northern migrants to gwangdung province would naturally bring more northern chinese facial feature into the original gene pool of the cantonese so they look more tungusa.

I am confused as to those so-called North-South Chinese distinction (which distinctions?). If I remember correctly, the photo you call "Northern" don't feel "Northerner" at all to me.
The personal attached photo above look like "Mainland Chinese", I don't have a sense of him looking especially North or South Chinese.
The soldier somehow looks strange. I remember someone I knew but can't remember whom. Should be a Malay.
note: many of the Beijingers have special sense of look to me, I don't know why.

Isn't this the pictures of Vietnamese kids?


Interesting.. Double nails? In which positioning? Vertically? It seems some specialized genetic strangeness, I don't think any ethnic group has people with (totally) double-nailed in one toe.

well, I have met chinese having it too, although they are not cantonese. Isn't the south not limited to just cantonese? I am sorry I really could not recall the "type of chinese" used in the article which had references to various historical documents. Reason given as explained earlier.

The doublenailed is found in the last toes of BOTH feet.

My point is, many people travelled southward from the north. Nanking ( Nanjing) is not found in the southern end, rght?

As for looks, pls refer to the half filled or half empty glass. There are bound to be some linked but to say in specific vietnamese and cantonese r the same?

Some Northern Chinese do not like this idea but it's the truth. They thought that the Yue was completely wiped out by the Han Chinese. What do you think about that

... But does the HongKongers have it? And non-Chinese?
This characteristics may not say anything about ancient population migration if it's a "new thing" that happens only in a few places in Guangdong.

LOL who has ever said Vietnamese and Cantonese are the same?

To say Yue was completely wiped out is simply do not know Vietnam. No one thinks like that.

What/Who were the Yue?

The Yue were non-Han Chinese (Zhuang, Cantonese and others) and Vietnamese.
Before the scripts written by Han Chinese officials, they were already there, and then
recorded or reported by Han Chinese officials, SiMa Qian, as you all know, as example.

Nowadays, the Zhuang are in GuangXi, YunNan, and north Vietnam as Tay, Nung, Tho.
The Cantonese are in GuangDong and GuangXi. The Vietnamese are still in Vietnam.
The others are now in China as Han, or they are in Vietnam as Vietnamese minorities,
or Laotian in Lao, or Thai in Thailand, etc.

However, some Vietnamese say that the Vietnamese were originally in YangZi river
area, beyound GuangDong, GuangXi and YunNan. How can that be? Did the Vietnamese
migrate through the areas of the Zhuang and the Cantonese? They did that before the
time of SiMa Qian?

TrueViet, you are referring to the myth of Hong Bang. It is a myth. But myths also have merits. One just have to approach them carefully.
About this myth, I think the territory referred was that of The BaiYue, not of a nation by the Vietnamese, or Northern Vietnamese to be exact, the Luo Yue.

Someone may argue that The BaiYue is the ancient Vietnamese.
To avoid the ambigous arguments, could you simplify and narrow down
the answer to the point of the Jing ethnic in Vietnam and the YangZi river?
Is the origin homeland of the Jing ethnic in Vietnam the YangZi river area?

However, the "Cantonese" were not there. Though I have nothing for for Zhuang I doubt Zhuang were also there. In that kind of theory... "Bai Yue was only near Yangzi river area", just migrated southward.

How if their relatively-close ancestors were from YangZi river area, while they only got the name "Jing" after they migrated South? (well, this is just a theory, but it fits the pattern of migration of Asians that time, I think around a few centuries B.C.)
Is the 'homeland' refer to 'where they were named' or...?

{My grandparents were born in different country from mine, so is my homeland 'where I was born' or 'where my (close) ancestry led to'?}

Homeland is in the sense of "root."

The theory of the Root of the Vietnamese is in YangZi River area have some weaknesses as:

1- The motive of their migrating to the south, and the reasons on how they
settled in the Red River Delta without continuing their journey to unknown
destination?

2- The lack of evident of is there a trace of the migration.
Have the Jing moved the entire people without leaving any witnesses behind?

3- Is there any ethnic groups living on their journey from YangZi to Red River?
How did the immigrants deal with them? Killed them all? Or take them along?
The ratio between the immigrants and the local people going along with them
on the journey to the Red River Delta?

4- No answer for the question of how the immigrants deal with local people
who had already in the Red River Delta. Did the immigrants from YangZi kill
all local people? Or they live together? The ratio between local and new comers?

5- How to explain about the language classification of the Jing as Mon Kh' Me
with addition flavor of Tai-Kadai and then Sino-Tibetan?

For the record and for later comers who did not witnessed the actual sequence of postings and replies of the many relevant different threads concerned, the current thread is a composition of a large number of differing threads. Because this final thread is an artificial editing and re-editing of the original very heated and argumentative multi-threads, it does not reflect a number of the original contextual reasons for a number of the replies. That is a number of posts and replies have been taken out of context and would seem out of place and even a tag too strong. But however for all of my replies in their original context they are very reasonable and justified. Because of the jumbling up of posts from many different separates topic threads and merging them all together, many of the posts of which I have criticized and complaint about have been left out and deleted from this final artificial thread.

These are fair questions, and I will try to tackle them one at a time, in the same sequence you posed.

1. The Hong Bang myth did not specify the direction of migration, only that the destination was a place where water was abundant (Thuy Fu, or Waterside Dwelling). As to the motive, I suspect that with the date being about 5000 years ago, wet rice cultivation may have increased the population and created a slight problem of overpopulation. These people moved to areas of hunter-gatherers where wet rice cultivation could be practiced. The Red River Delta is one of those. By that time, another people have settled in the Ma River Delta in North Central Vietnam, but the new immigrants were able to mix with them as well. These settled people are called Nusantao people by Solheim II, a scholar who theorizes that there was a maritime trade along the coast of South China from Shanghai down to Taiwan and Vietnam, which settled people in the coastal area who intermarried with indigenious peoples starting from 7000 years ago. When the sea level went up from 8000 years to 4000 years ago, they moved en mass farther inland from so called Hainanland, a now much submerged area linking North Vietnam, Hainan, Taiwan, and Shanghai, and took land from the hunter-gatherers. These people spoke Austronesian languages.

2. The lack of evidence may be due to the suppression of HuaXia culture. Only in Vietnam does the tale of the trip survives in the form of an oral myth, as other Yue legacies.

3. The immigration was done peacefully for the most part, as it went through an area populated by peoples of a same race. When it was not, indigenious people fled, or were killed. The remaining surrendered people mixed with the immigrants.

4. In North Vietnam, the indigenious people were an admixture of Australoid and Mongoloid called Melanesian (which in Greek means black people of the islands, as they now populates some islands in South Pacific) of The Bac Son Culture. The immigrants were not pure Mongoloids, but also of an admixture of predominantly Mongoloid stock. The mixing of these two admixtures tilted more towards the immigrants, as they were the victors.

5. These immigrants spoke a Mon-Khmer language, which belongs to the Austroasiatic family, spoken in South China, India, and inland South East Asia. I suspect that Au Co means these people in the Hong Bang Myth. With time, the Austronesian sub family of Tai-Kadai encroached upon territories of Austroasiatic speaking people, may be fairly peacefully, as both Austroasiatic and Austronesian belong to the Austric super family, once pronounced a dead theory, now a revived and stronger theory. The influence on Vietic is not just tonal, but lexical (having to do with vocabulary of basic words) as well.
The Sino-Tibetan influence was from Chinese colonization.

Without evidence, how do you, or anyone for that matter, know these myths to be true?

There are many myths throughout numerous cultures, some are obviously false, while a few are true and the rest are based on facts. However, without evidence, there is no way to know whether a myth is true or not.

Also, it may be easy for you to point fingers and blame the Huaxia culture for the lack of evidence but how would you know if there are any in the first place?

Just because you want to believe in something it doesn't mean it's real.

BTW, you seem to have made numerous claims with some very specific details here. Care to provide evidence to back up your claims?

Yes, myths are just that --myths. They can only be used as, for example, suggestions for direction of research.
I don't mean to be chauvinistic, and point fingers at HuaXia. But it is recorded in history that former territories of Yue, Wu, and even Chu were totally or partially populated by Yue peoples. Possibly even Shu. The fact that few traces of Yue culture remains makes for a good suspicion that there indeed has been suppression. This is common in human endeavour, and nothing to fuss about. No hatred on my part. Just trying to get to the bottom of things.
OMG, I did make numerous claims, did I not? Oh, dear! It is a fair challenge on your part. Though we are no scholars, we must be responsible for what we write. But it would be an overwhelming task to try to prove every little things you have to say. This would paralized anyone to inaction, and take the fun out of any spirited discussion. So if you don't mind, can you name which of those you want me to work on shuffling my materials or memories to prove?

I personally have only heard a few Vietnamese make claims as you have above. I am not saying it's false but are there any evidence to support such claims?


You are right that we aren't scholars, which is why what most of us say or think don't really matter as they won't have that much of an affect on our world.

I was more curious as you how came to the conclusion of your statement rather than challenging you though.

What separates discussions from gossips is that the former is based on facts, not baseless tales...

About the statelets of Wu and Yue constituting related ethnics, "Wu and Yue were both composed of Yue peoples." (1) Of the 4 layers of the Hemudu village site, the top one probably was the remains of the common civilization that later resulted in these two states, among any others nearby, such as Yang Yue, or Min Yue.
About the statelet of Chu being a multi-ethic nation, constituting mainly of Nan Man, descendants of San Miao tribes, and Yue, the Wucheng site in Jiangxi Qing Jiang county was at one time part of Chu territory. It is believed that the site belong to the Yue (2)
The SanXingDui site shows many bronze statues with faces having big eyes and a big noses. This is a face of an admixture of Australoid and Mongoloid, with the Mongoloid element predominant, much more related to Yue than to HuaXia racially (3).

(1) http://mcel.pacificu.edu/as/resources/zhua...nchor-THE-44867
(2) Jiangxisheng Bowuguan and Beijing Daxue Lishrxi Kaogu Zhuanye and QingJiangxian Bowuguan, [The Jiangxi Provincial Museum and Beijing University Department of History, Archaeological Section, and the Jiangxi Qingjiang county Museum] "Jiangxi Qingjiang Wucheng Shangdai Yizhi Fazhue Jianbao," [ A Brief report on the Excavation of the Jiangxi Qingjiang County Shang-era Site at Wucheng] Wen Wu, July 1975, 7th Qi, #230, pp. 51-71. p. 51.
(3) http://china.tyfo.com/int/art/folk/relics/.../sanxingdui.htm

OK, the odd of a migrantion from YangZi Riverto Red River is 50%,
as the same possibility as of a fiction. What time was it then,
in comparision with the DongSon Drum people?

If the local people were majority, and the migrants were minority,
how we can say that the mordern Viet are from the YangZi River?
Can we say that when the population of the local equals to the migrants?
How many percents is the ratio between local people and YangZi migrants
to make the claim a valid one?

1. In one claim it is assumed that Yue people are Austroasiatic. Those were agricultural people (well actually many of other groups there are also, including 'Sino'!!), so they tend to expand in the water area. Unless forced they would not leave watery land.. (how about Arem? Did they really never know rice?? )

2.Trace? If there were many witnesses but no one wrote it down it would become legends! (since mouth-to-mouth transfer is not accurate)
By the way, the legends seem to be the remaining evidences, though almost not reliable at all.
Also it can be suggested a method like how people connected European myths; later connected Indian myth and trace to the same origin.
(How could this be used at all? Do you know how is Chinese and Hmong legends?)

3 and 4. If the racism is strong enough then there would not be any additional mixture; what Austro percentage pre-Jing people have is brought without significant change.
Assuming that Mongolians were smarter than Melanesians... (oops, what an assumption is it? ) the Yue would succesfully pass through all humanly obstacles.
When "Bai Yue" expanded perhaps they already expelled most of the Negritos and we don't know if it's pre-Jing that expanded there first.... (well, the assumption is that originally there were slow expansion, not forced ones; however, it can't be verified.)
A few Negrito still remain; they were given as "gifts" to Roman by a Chinese general (forgot which) after their connection established...

by the way, Ahman once said that according to his friend who conducted a teeth survey, Vietnamese people have about 70% shoveling incisor, I see that it's not much different from China-Mongolia?

5. According to the assumption no1 there's nothing to be said, just Tai and Chinese contribute to "a few" basic words. However, using any other assumptions should have more argumentation: just how Austroasiatic people can subdue those newcomers to speak their language.

And moreover Tai should not be a part of Austronesian, and though seem the Austronesian and Austroasiatic somehow related, Austric is not generally accepted. I follow the trend of SIL.

******************************************************************
Chu, Wu, Yue seemed related people (cultural similarities?). Some claims they were all Austroasiatic? Their cultures were often commented by others from the North.
If I recall correctly, sometimes said as 'inferior/barbaric countries'?

The DongSon Civilization is about 4000 years old. This myth told of a story that began almost 5000 years ago.
The immigrants were maybe 85% Mongoloid-15% Australoid, and after mixing with the 6000 year old BacSon Culture 50% Mongoloid-50% Australoid Melanesian, resulted in a DongSon Culture 75% Mongoloid-25% Australoid Indonesian stock.
In cultural terms, though, there is continuity between these two civilizations, and even between the BacSon Civilization and the preceding HoaBinh Civilization, though the HoaBinh people were 100% Australoid.
Mongoloid has a Southern origin. so maybe there was no immigrations. Maybe there was just genetic mutation from Australoid to Mongoloid. Still being debated, I think.

I wonder how "Australoid culture" was, because I see that Papuans were primitive; "Mongoloid" has a Southern origin also strange, because those "Mongoloid" characteristics are more probably to develop far from the equator. (in this case far North)

From O-type Y-gene, there seem was already migration to South and North (O predecessor was from North but O3 was from South, and yet O3 is quite common in North).

As for teeth, from my post here (oops, I copied this thing into here..) http://www.chinahistoryforum.com/index.php...dpost&p=4769520 if Ahman's claim was right then how much more "Australoid" is Vietnamese compared to East Asians? ; I believe the "Sundadonts" here were descended from "Mongoloid" and "Australoid", though I have not seen how much shoveling is in "pure Australoid". What I also saw somewhere was that the Europeans only have 4-5%.

The HoaBinh Civilization, spread over all South East Asia, and South China, during the Middle Stone Age, from I think 20 thousand years ago, was probably the most advanced civilization at that period.
The theory of Mongoloids having a Southern Mongoloid origin is propagated by scholars/researchers such as Chu et al
http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/95/20/11763
The Vietnamese now (and I am talking about Central and Southern Vietnamese as well) are predominantly Mongoloid. Most of us Vietnamese do not debate this. Sites dated before Chinese occupation already showed this to a great degree. It became even more so after 1000 years of being part of China.
But there has been cultural continuation. The BacSon people, being an admixture, showed that the Australoid and the Mongoloid did mix, and whatever the Australoid HoaBinh Civilization was, was received and developed further by this admixture people. Then there was a repeat of that in the DongSon Civilization, as their sites showed both types of skulls, Melanesian and Indonesian, with Indonesian being 75% Mongoloid. The continuation also is shown in artifacts of the two civilizations.

I do not know about "Australoid and the Mongoloid did mix"
but I do not believe in your fiction about Vietnamese origin was from China.

I can make much better fiction, but I do not have gut to post here.

The Zhuang, now living in QuangXi, used to live from Hunan down. Their progenitors were the Xi Ou and the Luo Yue. The Hong Bang Myth (Hong Bang was the royal family name, also called Hung, such as the royal family that ruled the Chu nation, and possibly related to Khun, an Austroasiatic or Austronesian word meaning "king"; it is possible that the Chu language belong to either one of these two families) was probably initiated by Northern Yue society elite refugees in Vietnam. The territory mentioned probably referred to the Southern Bai Yue territory, with Luo Yue being only part of it. Luo Yue territory, however, included Hepu in Southwestern GuangDong, and Southwestern GuangXi.
As to how the Mongoloid element came about in Vietnam, there is still no answer. We only know the facts: over 10 thousand years ago, the Australoids lived there. After that, there was a roughly 50% Mongoloid element (the admixture is called Melanesian), and 4 thousand years ago, there was another admixture who was roughly 75%-85% Mongoloid(called Indonesian). This could be the result of genetic mutation, or it could be the result of immigration.
Many Vietnamese nationalists do not want anything to do with "China." Some others want to claim Bai Yue territory. I think both camps, frankly, are misinformed. The North Vietnamese were Luo Yue. The Zhuang is our brother, but not ourselves. The Northern Yue are our relatives.
We were just a small part of the Bai Yue, and though we may be the center of the HoaBinh Civilization, itself the center of Asian, if not the world's civilization, about 7 thousand years ago, the center moved North, albeit still within Bai Yue territory, making the Luo Yue and the Southern branch of the Bai Yue off the center of civilization. The torch was passed, but to our consolation, if such is needed, we once held the torch, and can't justifiably be called "barbarian" (in fact all Yue were called such, and we now know that it could be the other way around; if HuaXia wants to claim Yue legacy, then ancient texts which vilified Yue should be erased --an impossible task.)

Long long ago, people traveled, moving back and fort, who cares and who knows?

Let's talk about the latest time, when we have more chance to get close to the truth.

You said that the ancient VietNam king "ruled Chu nation?" and none in the "loyal family"
know any Chinese characters? So, after they took "refugees in Vietnam" they could not
carry any trace of Chinese characters. MaYuan general in Han dynasty collected many
copper drums, and there were non of Chinese characters on the drums.

You said, the Vietnamese were in "Southwestern GuangDong, and Southwestern GuangXi."
Why was not the Vietnamese in nowadays Vietnam? When did they move to Vietnam then?

Hm... I don't know how old is 'Mongoloid' actually, and how old is the O-marker.

As for the word, I can't find it in modern Indonesian since Indonesians use Indian loanword 'raja' for 'king'. What 'Khun' is similar to is the word meaning 'human' of Thai and the '君'(in context of 君主) meaning something like 'lord' of Chinese.

Well, as far as I know the Han-age territory of Luo Yue included not only Guangdong and Guangxi, but also North Vietnam.

While it's possible to derive Mongoloid from Australoid, I don't think the 'intermediate form of evolution' is the same as 'mixed form'..

Calling other people 'barbarians' was a Chinese habit, I'll say. I think no matter how civilized other people were, they were called like barbarian as long as the culture is different enough. However, Vietnamese considered Cambodians as 'barbarians'? And tried to "civilize" them ?
As with the "Yue legacy", the leader of Yue themselves claimed to be xth (I forgot) descendant of Xia first lord.

the latest time might be unwritten, and turned into myths.

Chinese characters were only known by few people, mostly loyal family of Chu, so I doubt that common people will make their script from that. But even if they preserved/developed from Chinese characters, we would not be able to find ancient things with Han Characters since the script Chinese used had not developed into the form like it.

The myth didn't specifically claim that the Hung royal family of Van Lang ruled Chu, but this family name is the same as that of Chu royal one. This is something that should trigger investigation, but there are discrepancies in the myth and reality. For one, the date of the myth preceeds that of the founding of the Chu state by almost 2000 years.
Sorry, I meant to say that in addition to being in North Vietnam, probably its center from which the Luo Yue contributed, possibly lead, the Southern Yue branch civilization, they also were in Hepu and Southwestern GuangXi.
Gou Jian (sp?) claimed to have been descended from Hsia Yu as a way to manufacture legitimacy to be second from the Zhou Kings only, and lead over other nations as Ba (don't know the Mandarin transliteration). The Yue had nothing to do with the HuaXia ethnically. Though culturally there may be a relation a long time back, as one theory has it that a tribe living at the border of the HoaBinh Civilization, possibly in Yunnan, went North along the mountain range Chin Ling, crossed the passes to enter the Wei River Valley, met with another group from the Han River Valley, and formed HuaXia. The HoaBinh Civilization, I think is closer to the later Yue ethnically, as the 1st and 2nd layers of the Hemudu site were probably Australoid, the race that founded the HoaBinh Civilization, though link between these bottom layers and the top 2 layers of this site is yet to be established.

Er... Lots of people adopted surnames unrelated to them, so the probability of relationship is quite scarce. Like the question the Ly of Vietnam, Lee of Korean and Li of Tang dynasty were all related?

Hm... how can they just use the name of Xia to 'threaten' the "neighboring" nations e.g. Ba (same spelling). "Huaxia" may be self-contradictory: I've heard that Xia-Yu himself was not from Huangdi tribe (thus no one can say that Goujian and Yu were actually related or not, though most probably not).

As the theory of Huangdi's tribe themselves, I don't know where they come from, but somehow I don't believe in that theory... while I can't think of good reasons.

It does seem that "Huaxia" and Yue were not derived from each other, but how close/far was the common ancestor? I don't know. Probably "Huaxia" were part of "Yue" ? By the way "Yue" cannot be defined before the age of Chinese, so that's really can't be said.
As they are no good definitions, anyone can generalize "Yue" until American Natives , as the similarities between them can be found.

Yue is a vague term people enjoy using it in their hypocritical hypothesises.

They can use other words that are more honest than "Yue" in their valuable projects.

Here's the picture of ancient China, far from Vietnam:
Eastern Zhou Dynasty Map - (770 to 221 BC - 551Years):
http://www.paulnoll.com/China/Dynasty/dynasty-East-Zhou.html

Timeline of Vietnam Prehistory:
http://www.viettouch.com/pre-hist/dongson_timeline.html

VIETNAM'S PREHISTORY AND LEGENDS:
http://www.richmond.edu/~ebolt/history398/HungVuong.html

CO-LOA AND ITS LEGEND:
http://www.richmond.edu/~ebolt/history398/...dItsLegend.html

Timeline of Vietnam History:
http://www.terragalleria.com/vietnam/info/timeline.html

Although I do not believe in the theory of Vietnam's prehistory,
I can see that there is no connection or relationship between
Vietnam's prehistory and China' Eastern Zhou Dynasty.

I got the following message at an attempt to upload a picture in my PC:
The requested file upload failed because suitable permissions have"
not been enabled on the 'uploads' directory. Please contact the board"
administrator and inform them of this error."

Zhou was not considered the first Chinese dynasty. (Well, if Yu of Xia and Tang of Shang were considered Chinese.)
The first authority that is still considered Chinese by Chinese now is Huangdi, even centuries before Xia. I don't trust rather legendary age of 3056BC or 2876BC because writing was not widespread and mouth-to-mouth tradition was regularly used.

but I believe 200 year is more than enough to migrate from "Vietnam" to Zhou and back.

The relationship between people can be seen from e.g. "Crossbow is said to be adopted by Chinese from other Asiatic people."; the illustration itself uses Chinese cloth? LOL. Hard to believe.

Are the present Vietnamese direct descendants of Dong Son culture? How about the Southern Yue? These question I can't answer.

The image uploading here has rather small limit, try to open a free account e.g. in imageshack.com or photobucket.com.

I think the present Vietnamese people is essentially the direct descendant of the Dong Son people. And the Dong Son people is one of the Southern Yue peoples.
VietGenes mentioned in a thread in this forum that The Human Genome Project shows that the people of Vietnam, GuangDong (former NanYue), and Fujian (formerly MinYue) are very close. Even KeJiang (sp?) (formerly Gu Yue) is similar, though not as much. So not just Southern Yue, but Northern Yue as well, in DNA terms; though in cultural terms, there is clear distinction between the 2, and the Dong Son belong to the Southern Yue.
The Vietnamese rejection of this similarity stems from the fact that these former Yue peoples now considered themselves HuaXia. And they certainly and understandably do not want their HuaXia-ised cousins to HuaXia-ise them.

All Asian people are related.
So, when you look northwardly, you see the Vietnamese are closely related to the Chinese .
You forget to look southwardly. At this direction, you see the Vietnamese are more closely
related to the Cambodian than to the Chinese.
That is the reason you try to prove that the Vietnamese are from China rather than the
Vietnamese are the local people in their homeland.
200 years are enough for the ancient Vietnamese traveling several rounds around the globe.
May be the ancient Vietnamese are people who built great statues on the island in south America?

TrueViet, I didn't say we were from China.
I think we underwent a genetic mutation, and transformed from Australoid to Mongoloid. Then some of us moved North, and became Northern Mongoloids (Siberians). Before that, Australoids and Melanesians also went North, but we are Dong Son descendants, who came to existence later, 4000 years ago.
This is before China was founded North of the Yellow River and the Khmer people arrived to Kampuchia.

People in Zhe Jiang, formerly Yang Yue area are also similar to Vietnamese (said to be); however I sense hidden assumption of Huaxia here: It seems assumed that Huaxia people were very very different from Yue. ;
I don't know what genes was tested, but that statement (Vietnamese close to Guangdong etc) is similar to what I read in HLA test; but I wouldn't be able to give any real comment before you show me the link to that post.


This example does not make sense. Are people in the South always closer than people in the North?
I don't need to argue much, just give a similar but different example:
Egyptian: look eastwardly they are close to Arabian (in fact Egyptians speak and look Arabian!!);
southwardly they are "closer" to Blacks?

Human walked, and not everyday-migrating, also the migration tools were not that advanced. My past assumption might be wrong, but this migration speed does not seem very ancient-humanly.

I don't know when Khmer people arrived to Kampuchia, but I believe the Xia state was founded before 2000BC, said to be around 24th century BC. As the "Southern origin of Mongoloid", I still doubt on how the "Mongolian eyefold" developed in such a "tropical" place.
About mutation: mutation almost always make people diverge in characteristics; natural mutation would mean Xia's ancestor split from Vietnamese' ancestor quite "recent" in order for many to look similar.
Was Dong Son people part of Bai Yue? I don't know; Were Dong Son people close to modern Vietnamese genetically? I don't know.

I quoted VietGenes, and don't have the source direct quote.

This is not example. This is the fact that the Cambodians are in the south of Vietnam now,
and that they are closely related to the Vietnamese. This is not a theory for you to apply
to other cases. I just meant that people tend to compare the Vietnamese to the Chinese
who are in the north of Vietnam, and they do not have the tendency to compare and contrast
the Vietnamese to the Cambodians who are in the south of Vietnam. When you do a scientific
research, you should consider many aspects, and you should prepare yourself to stand the
challenges from different direction. So, people forgot to think about the possibility of the
Vietnamese and the Cambodians are closerly related. That makes their points of the Vietnamese
origin being from the north unreliable.

The ancient Vietnamese were known as people of the water. They could travel very well on the
pacific ocean to the far-away land and islands. Some of ethnic groups in Vietnam nowadays are
from the Phillipines, and other islands of the Pacific Ocean. They are living evidences.

Is the post in this forum? You can just post the thread and the post number.


It's not that I've never compared Cambodian with Vietnamese. In fact xng has already compared Viets with Cambodian and by short observation he said they're not similar, and I think so. So, (assuming the linguistic trend hold) only the language are closely related, other ways are very different; but you without too clear a reason say Vietnamese are closer to Cambodian, which look to me like a dogma; geographically some places in Vietnam is. But Having a very small geographical distance does not mean genetically very closely related, like various ethnics in New York.
Assumptions that are seemingly wrong (e.g. Vietnamese->Tai->Sino-Tibetan) could be forgotten for a long time, like how I forgot to consider whether or not Cambodians should be considered as close brothers to Vietnamese.

Various Southeast Asian Negrito ethnics, who do not look like "ordinary" Austronesian or Austroasiatic, speaks either Austronesian or Austroasiatic. An additional distrust of language-ethnic relationship for me.

How do you know which direction they lead to? In fact I believe in the reverse assumption, they migrated to Pacific ocean and Phillipines from Asian; much more than the reverse way.
I never heard and I can't verify or argue about "ancient Vietnamese were known as people of the water"; or what "water" is being used here; however, I believe the "water" here refers to river, not ocean.

Quotes from VietGenes:
http://www.chinahistoryforum.com/index.php...wtopic=1838&hl=
Post #72.
Pew! You made me dig through 15 some pages!

The Vietnamese being more like the Chinese or Cambodian depends on the eye of the beholders.

I do not say the distances between places are important factors in this matter. However, the fact
of people in New York or HongKong not being related may not be very suitable in this case.
By applying this way of thinking and reasoning, we would never get to anywhere.

About the Vietnamese are water-people: The Japanese, the people on islands, the people on
the coastal areas are all water-people. It is not difficult to see and to understand that.
During thousands of years, people travelling by sea, back and fort. There is no reason they
have not come to the continent and resettled after generations on the islands? Some Taiwanese,
Vietnamese, and people on island or penisulas in Pacific ocean speak the languages of the
same language family. This is an evidence for their being relatives.

I do not have time to quote the links to articles about that. You may not take my words for that.
You do not need to search for them, either. Selfcultivation of the mind is a free choice.

TrueViet, for convenience, I'll help the search:
William Solheim II, one of the most well-known American scholars on East Asia, theorizes a "Nusantao" maritime people 7000 years ago frequenting waters along China's and Vietnam's coasts. They settled along these coasts, and mixed with indigeneous peoples.
The Cham people, the Funan people, and the Luo people belonged to this group. Luo means "water" literally. These people spoke Austronesian languages. Luo then mixed with another people from inland, who spoke an Austroasiatic language of the Mon-Khmer family, and the mixture is now called Vietic. Vietic includes Muong, and contains roughly 40% Austronesian basic words. Tai-Kadai, spoken by the Zhuang, descendants of the Xi Ou, is an Austronesian language. Though not technically considered Jing, the Muong hero Le (Li) Loi, and his Trinh (Zheng) and Nguyen (Ruan) Muong assistants ended the Ming 20-year domination to become the longest ruling dynasty of Vietnam. The Nguyen lords expanded the country from mid Central Vietnam to the present extent with the help of Cham people. So this water element is present in all Vietnamse ethnics, and these ethnics all participate in the history of the nation in positive ways; the current Vietnamese leader is a Zhuang, and though not Vietic speaking natively, is a Nusantao descendant nevertheless. Dong Son drums are found in Indonesia and Siberia. These people can sail!

Argh... that makes me remember of (outdated) Cavalli-Sforza tree, which surprisingly fits well with CrimsonLightning's theory.

Up to you.
For the ones who have not seen most kind of both Vietnamese and Cambodian, it depends on thoughts rather than eye. For me, some Vietnamese are similar to Chinese and can pass very well, however, those who looks Cambodian (?) does not fit too well with "normal" Cambodians.

Well said, I don't know what you are thinking. How unsuitable is New York-Hong Kong relationship if some of them still speak the same languages?


Ouch, let us assume first that the languages are rather accurate for islanders due to lack of contact.
The "Islander" languages you said of is called Austronesian. Rather, they not only make the term but also sub-divide it. There are some subgroups those are only found in the islands not continental. The only group in continents I can think of is Malayic and they rather seem to expand from Malaysia rather than what I think to be "Pacific Islands".


"Luo", "Lac" : I don't find "water" in any (Asian) languages I know. In Malay, Japanese, Tsat, Sundanese, Chinese (several language), Vietnamese all are very different from "Luo".
I also sense assumption of Tai being assumed to be Austronesian.
Is "Nusantao" a name given by Portuguese/Spanish? And it seems based on/related to "Nusa" in Indonesian ("Island").

Never know which group are "Zhuang" in Vietnam... They take other name.
About Dong Son drums being found in Indonesia to Siberia, perhaps that was not exactly Dong Son? (but related people)? Without any clue, I would think that middle part of the expansion range might be the source.
Yooks, that makes me remember on how some says Shang was Austronesian.

1- Residents in New York City may speak the same American English, but they are from Europe, Africa, Asia, and other places in the world. Residents in HongKong may speak the same Cantonese, but they are not all Cantonese. These facts cannot be applicable to the Jing in Vietnam and the Cambodians speak their mothertoungues in Mon Khmer family language. People in New Work City or Hongkong have their own mothertoungues that are different than the common languages they learn in the location they live. Comparing and contrast the fact of the mothertoungues the Vietnamese and the Cambodians speak to the fact of the learnt languages people in New York City or Hongkong speak, the speakers tried to make the discussion confusing.

2- There are several ethnic groups in Vietnam who speak Malayo-Polynesian.

3- Luo Yue (in Mandarin PinYin) or Lac Viet (in Vietnamese script) was the ancient Vietnamese in BaiYue.
Luo or Lac was a name of a water bird in Vietnamese language.

4- The Zhuang in Vietnam are: Tho, Nung, Tay. The current First Secretary of the Vietnamese Communist Party -- the highest authority in power -- is a Tay.

5- Dong Son drums are copper drums made by ancient Zhuang people in China and ancient Jing in Vietnam. Who was the first people invented Dong Son drums -- Zhuang or Jing -- is still in debate today. However, how Dong Son drums moved to Indonexia has been determined: by sea.

The following are quoted from http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/4130.htm
Vietnam's identity has been shaped by long-running conflicts, both internally and with foreign forces. In 111 BC, China's Han dynasty conquered northern Vietnam's Red River Delta and the ancestors of today's Vietnamese. Chinese dynasties ruled Vietnam for the next 1,000 years, inculcating it with Confucian ideas and political culture. In 939 AD, Vietnam achieved independence under a native dynasty.

#1 Sorry, but actually I still don't understand your point.
Some people lost their mother tongue, change into others, seemingly by some direct contact.
There are some part of Miao or Yao who speak a separate Taic language, that belongs to *their own* (showing that it's not like "recent" contact like English mother-tongued "Blacks"). But ethnically they are still Miao. Cao Miao: http://www.ethnologue.com/show_language.asp?code=cov

#2 Austronesian means the same as Malayo-Polynesian. I know you refer to them. What I know their language is related closely to Western Indonesians (belongs to Malayic subgroup of Sundic Austronesian).

#3 If it's a name of a bird, then it's more like 雒 than 駱. Again, they read the same in Modern languages, without ideographs it's easy to confuse them.

#4 Though they all speak Taic languange, Tay is not Zhuang. Tay is Dai3 傣 in Chinese (Mandarin). And isn't Tho a Viet-Muong?
http://www.ethnologue.com/show_country.asp?name=VN
hm... a confusing thing is that some Tay are also called Tho.

#5 Zhuang or Jing is quite "recent" to me, so seems just the ancestors (may even be the ancestor of both). Just asking, how old actually are the "Dong Son drums" in Indonesia and Siberia?

#6 Vietnam's identity has been shaped by long-running conflicts, so??

1- I don't think the Vietnamese lost their mother tongue.
Therefore, residents in New York city are not the case.

4- You are better than I am in this subject.
I also think that it's confusing to call Tay as Tho.

5- Zhuang is one of the largest minority group in China.
Jing is one of the smalest minority group in GuangXi China.
Jing is the majority group in Vietnam. I don't think Zhuang and Jing are closed related.
Don Son drums were made by the Zhuang in China and the Jing in Vietnam.
It is not clear that Dong Son drums were made or traded to Indonexia.
However, the art of DongSon drums was shared between Indonexia and continent.
At that time, people can share only by means of sailings rather than electronic mails.
You may searh google by the keyword "bronze drums" or "Dong Son drums."

6- So, we may know that the Vietnamese was not Han at the beginning.
It is not clear that the ancient Vietnamese are Cantonese related or Zhuang related.
You or someone else may want to make a point here, but I just stop short here.
Then the Vietnamese adopted a lot of words from Tai and Sino languages.
The Vietnamese also learnt some traditions from China, and much more, in many aspects.
That is the explanation of "Vietnam's identity has been shaped" for centuries.

What are you referring to?
Some areas in Vietnam (in fact the area I'm from, the Center), "nu+o+'c," which in Vietnamese means water (and country, interestingly, and maybe revealingly?), is called "na'c". And Vietnamese sometimes cannot pronounce the sound represented by the letter "N," and use the sound /l/ instead. So La.c means Na'c, which means nu+o+'c --water. Muong's word for water is "rac." (TrueViet, could you confirm?). And we all know that /r/ and /l/ are interchangeable in various languages.
Karlgren, the famous Sinologist, studied ancient Chinese, and his dictionary shows that the three Luo characters, with radicals insect, horse with black top hair, and water, all were pronounced.../lak/ (BTW, this possibly add to some Southern Chinese assertion that Mandarin is non traditional, and Northern Chinese Tungusic element may be substantial).

Indeed, it means islanders in (some) Austronesian language(s).

The bronze found in Indonesian are recognized by international experts as Dong Son. I don't know about the ones in Siberia. As these Nusantao went to Madagascar, I guess they can go to Siberia, too, weather permitting. We know that after the last Ice Age, it became warm, with the sea level rising 100 meters from 8000 BP to 4000 BP, the weather was cooperating with these maritime traders.

I just noticed that I typed wrong character for Lac "water bird". It's not 雒, but 鵅.

Cao Miao has their own language/mother tongue; and it's Taic, while Cao Miao are closer to Miao (Hmong-Mien, another linguistic family) than Tay. If some ethnic split (like Tai with Zhuang) happened earlier, perhaps they would not be identified as Miao.

I think it looks not very similar to what I think of Indonesian traditional music instrument.
http://www.kepu.net.cn/english/nationality...0312240082.html says many ethnicities in China still make this kind of drums. (Spring and Autumn Period had not begun in 2700 BC, so this article is questionable). Baipu was just people living close to Pu river so still no clue whether it's Zhuang or Jing who made it.
According to http://www.chinaknowledge.de/Literature/Music/music.htm the Bronze Drums of Zhou was from South.


"Vietnamese was Han" is seemingly wrong, but it's not important for me.

The old tree, split sharply between "North Mongoloid" and "South Mongoloid", where "North Mongoloid" is shown closer to Caucasoid (therefore the "Indonoid" of CrimsonLightning here), "South Mongoloid" closer to Papuan ("Negritoid").

The N-losing-toward-L looks somehow Taic, but actually it's just quite a lazy tongue, and it's a "popular trend" in HK. The pattern ươ ~*a is seemingly common, even in Sino-Vietnamese the ươ is usually related to Chinese a or ia.
Taking from dchph's (weird) site, Muong language for water is dák (seemingly normal d like English, by comparing to some other languages).

The /Lak/ pronunciation of what is now /Luo/ was not too old, by comparing the reconstructions of some linguists.
And: I don't know how water is "lak". There is a character for 'water bird' with similar reading to it, but not 'water' itself. There is a river that has the same reading, but it's in Henan, and passes through modern place of Luo Yang.

Hm... 8000BP to 4000BP, isn't it before the age of Dong Son?
Madagaskar Austronesians seemingly came from Indonesia, it's said to be in AD and it's what I read long ago and I've already forgotten where I read.

The subject of "The Vietnamese originaly was Han" may be wrong to some of us, but it is one of the answer to the question of the thread. The other answer is "yes." Do we need to draw a pool to see how many percents of us, who participate in this thread, vote "no" (the rest is assumed to vote "yes") to the question.

On the matter of Luo/Lac meaning water, I think it is merely a suggestion. You may find evident supporting it as well as evedent against it. That is the reason I rely on the idea that people living in the coastal areas are water-people rather than the idea of Luo/Lac meaning water. However, Dong Son drums being found in both inland and islands is the evident that people at the time of Dong Son did travel by sea. Their sharing the technique, or the art, or just sharing the whole drums does not make much difference.